Dr Johnson did see Ellis but her eyes skittered over and past him in a trice and she sashayed past our hero without vouchsafing to him so much as an inch-let of recognition.

Oh no!

The House had just heard Defence Questions, presided over by the unflappable Secretary of State, Michael Fallon.

Should anything bad ever happen to Boris Johnson (I much hope it does not, for Boris is a star), Mr Fallon would be perfect as Foreign Secretary.

Yesterday he managed to glide with ease around all sorts of pitfalls, from Donald Trump’s comments about Nato to the meagre size of our Royal Navy.

Mr Fallon said he had been to the United States twice in the past three weeks, so there has plainly been some carpet-chewing about Nato behind the scenes.

Yet he spoke about it in so creamily confident a fashion that any public anxiety may have been allayed.

There was in Washington, he said, ‘a clear understanding of the importance of Nato’.

With his treacly tone he conveyed that publicity and open ab-dabs were the last thing we needed.

Perhaps the 10 Downing Street press office should get him to field calls when Boris next does that awkward business of telling the truth about some matter of international affairs.

Lord Pearson raised a question in the House of Lords about 'violent verses' in the Koran. A Lib Dem, Lady Hussein-Ece, questioned whether or not such a question was 'appropriate'

The day’s other notable event was a House of Lords question from Ukip’s brave Lord Pearson about ‘violent verses’ in the Koran.

Lord Pearson hoped that British Islam’s leaders would re-examine their faith’s attitude to these verses and place a higher value on the more peaceful parts of the Koran.

The House of Lords did not quite faint but there was certainly a fair amount of clucking.

A Lib Dem, Lady Hussein-Ece, questioned whether or not it was ‘appropriate’ for such a matter to be discussed in the Chamber.

The Home Office’s Lady Williams plainly thought it a horrid discussion, to be ended as fast as possible.

But Lord Pearson was supported by Crossbencher Lord Singh, who noted the ‘air of embarrassment’ that afflicted the House when religion was raised, ‘as if it were something private that should not be discussed’.

To the contrary, said Lord Singh, ‘it is very much a concern of us all’.